run_task

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided; the description mentions the mock provider behavior but fails to disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens to data during execution.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. However, the structure could be improved by front-loading the purpose more explicitly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of annotations, incomplete parameter descriptions, and no explanation of return values despite an output schema, the description leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%; the description only alludes to min_quality_tier without defining it or the 'objective' parameter. It does not add meaningful meaning beyond the schema's property names.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the verb ('Run') and the resource ('objective through ACR's task engine'). The tool's purpose is distinct from sibling tools (search, fetch), making selection unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides context on provider selection based on min_quality_tier or default configuration, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.